Agenda item

For Members to consider any petitions submitted with more than 200 signatures, in accordance with the Council’s petition rules and Standing Order 66.

NOTED

1.          the following petitions presented at the meeting:

·                   Yogi Pandya – objecting to proposals within the Brent Active Travel Plan: Preston Area (PM29).

·                   Alexandra Kelly – objecting to the Low Traffic Neighbourhood proposals in the Kensal, Brondesbury & Queens Park Area (LTN 19).

·                   Christopher Mahon (on behalf of Kilburn Village Residents Association) – objecting to the Low Traffic Neighbourhood proposals in the Kilburn Area (LTN20).

2.          The response from the Lead Member for Regeneration, Property & Planning to both the deputations and petitions, which highlighted:

·                   the trial nature of the proposals which had been designed to address the climate emergency and encourage more active and local modes of travel;

·                   the need to ensure full cooperation and collaboration in recognition of the concerns raised, along with the wide ranging nature of the discussions and engagement undertaken to date and planned moving forward;

·                   the fast tracked nature of the government’s conditional funding made available to support the initiative and context within which the proposals had needed to be developed.  Whilst this had required consultation and engagement to be undertaken as part of the active trials, the Council was keen to encourage further local active participation and engagement as the experimental Healthy Neighbourhood schemes continued to be developed.

In addition to the deputations received, the Mayor advised that he had also agreed to accept three petitions at the meeting again relating to Healthy Neighbourhood proposals.

The first of these related to the Active Travel Programme within Preston ward with Yogi Patel as lead petitioner.  The second related to proposed road closures in the Kensal, Brondesbury & Queens Park area, with Alexandra Kelly as lead petitioner.  The third and final petition was from the Kilburn Village Residents Associated and related to proposed road closures in their area with Christopher Mahon as lead petitioner.

The Mayor advised that unless otherwise indicated by Members, he intended to allow each of the nominated speakers up to five minutes to address the meeting in order to present their petitions.  As with the previous item, he would then provide Councillor Tatler, as Lead Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning with an opportunity to respond to the issues raised, for which she would also be allowed up to five minutes.

As no issues were raised in terms of the approach outlined, the Mayor welcomed Yogi Patel to the meeting and invited him to present the first petition, with the following issues highlighted:

·                Speaking on behalf of local residents from Thirlmere Gardens and other local roads in the area, Yogi Patel advised that whilst those who had signed the petition were supportive of the healthy neighbourhood concept and promotion of active travel in the area they were opposed to the blocking of roads, which were felt to create unnecessary boundaries between neighbourhoods;

·                Concerns were also highlighted in relation to the evidence around air quality, congestion and road safety used as the basis for designing the scheme implemented in their area and at the lack of prior consultation or engagement with local residents;

·                The practical difficulties created for local residents following implementation of the scheme were also highlighted, which included lack of what was felt to be adequate or accurate signage, limited turning space for vehicles, additional congestion, inconsiderate driving and vehicles not able to use the blocked roads having to make longer journeys, which in turn led to higher emissions.  This was seen as dangerous for local residents and properties;

·                Concerns were also raised in relation to the timing and execution of the works, taking account of other building and utilities works in the area which had led to some temporary barriers being moved to provide access;

·                As an alternative to the measures introduced, local residents had advised they would be supportive of one-way systems and increased signage to support the existing 20mph zone and to encourage traffic to use alternative routes without the need for planters or barriers.  In summing up, members were asked to recognise the impact in terms of congestion and parking which further development would have in an already densely populated area and the concerns raised in relation to consultation and the evidence provided to support the design of the scheme.  Those who had signed the petition were instead keen to focus on other types of environmental improvement, which it was felt would achieve a better impact locally.

The Mayor thanked Yogi Patel for presenting the petition and then welcomed Alexandra Kelly to present the second petition, on which the following issues were highlighted:

·                Members were advised that the petition being presented was seeking to oppose the proposals in relation to Low Traffic Neighbourhood Scheme covering the Kensal, Brondesbury & Queens Park area (LTN 19).  With over 2,300 signatures, those who had signed the petition were objecting to the proposed scheme being implemented without prior public consultation and the provision of supporting baseline data.  Concerns were also raised in relation to what appeared to be the prioritisation of a neighbourhood with access to significant green space and limited congestion at the expense of other parts of the borough.  It was felt the introduction of any scheme that would have a material impact on residents, should involve prior engagement with those affected residents;

·                The petitioners were also keen to highlight the impact that would be created by the displacement of traffic from low traffic neighbourhood areas on to surrounding main routes. This would not only increase congestion, emissions and pollution but it was felt would also disadvantage those relying on the main routes for their business or as a means of travelling to and from work or school, thus discriminating against those residents with no alternative means of travel;

·                Concerns were also expressed in relation to the lack of planning or engagement and the impact that the proposals would have on local residents wellbeing, with what appeared to be no measurable criteria against which to assess each scheme.  The petition also recognised the level of opposition to low traffic neighbourhoods across London, which had been subject to widespread protests and campaigns for their withdrawal;

·                With residents currently being encouraged to avoid public transport where possible, it was increasingly difficult for those with mobility issues, the elderly and tradespeople to travel and it was felt low traffic neighbourhoods would escalate these difficulties;

·                In summary, the petitioners were requesting that the Council reconsider their plans and meaningfully engage with local residents before any schemes were implemented.  This would enable account to be taken of local expertise and knowledge in the design of any measures that would assist in reducing pollution and improving the area for the benefit of all residents.

The Mayor thanked Alexandra Kelly for presenting her petition.  He then welcomed Christopher Mahon, to the meeting and invited him to present the third and final petition, on which the following issues were highlighted:

·                Speaking on behalf of the Kilburn Village Residents Association, members were advised that the petition being presented contained 363 signatures requesting the Low Traffic Neighbourhood Scheme in the Kilburn area (LTN 20) be suspended to enable detailed consultation and engagement with the local community.  The lack of prior public consultation had caused concern in the Kilburn area with residents also having raised fears around the safety of active travel schemes for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians resulting from the measures that had already been introduced;

·                The petitioners had also queried the rationale and evidence to support the introduction and design of the proposals in their area given the limited congestion and traffic issues currently being experienced.  Key concerns included the potential displacement of traffic to other routes with high volumes of traffic; the impact any diversion of traffic to more congested routes would have in increasing journey times leading to higher emissions and more pollution; the overall impact on the local area and in terms of road safety;

·                It was also pointed out that residents were concerned about how the Council planned to assess and measure the outcome of each scheme with the need for a robust methodology and comprehensive data gathering identified as essential in advance of any scheme being implemented;

·                Whilst recognising the nature of the climate emergency, the petitioners were keen to avoid schemes being introduced that would make the challenges to be addressed any worse and as such were seeking further clarity on the rationale for the proposals.  The need was also identified to ensure that knowledge and expertise available locally was utilised to assist in providing feedback on the design of any measures in an open and transparent way.

The Mayor thanked Christopher Mahon for presenting his petition and then moved on to invite Councillor Tatler, as Lead Member for Regeneration Property and Planning to respond to the comments raised under both this item and the deputations.

Having thanked the petitioners for their contributions, Councillor Tatler began her response by pointing out that there would never be a perfect solution to the climate emergency.  The need to tackle the damage already done would not be convenient, quick, or pain-free given the changes that would be required to everyone’s way of life in order to enable sustainable change.

Focussing on the implementation of active travel schemes, these were felt to represent one of the first opportunities locally to make a tangible difference in reducing the impact on the natural environment, providing a chance to think about changing the way things were done out of habit rather than necessity.  The way the schemes were being designed would also, she pointed out, provide the chance to test a range of measures to encourage people out of their cars and onto more locally suitable modes of travel as well as providing an opportunity for residents to experiment with the types of interventions needed to tackle pollution, improve air quality and reduce the harm done to the environment.

In terms of the concerns raised, Councillor Tatler also felt it important to recognise that the schemes being implemented would not necessarily be permanent solutions. They were being implemented on an experimental and trial basis.  If they succeeded, then further consideration would need to be given as to how best they could be incorporated into future public realm improvements.  If they did not work, the Council would look at alternative measures in order to mitigate any negative impacts or unintended consequences with the only immoveable part of the programme being the Council’s pressing and real commitment to deliver on its climate emergency obligations.

The concerns raised in terms of engagement and consultation had been understood by the Council but, at the same time, Councillor Tatler felt there was also a need to understand that in order to tackle climate change everyone would have to make and accept substantial changes to their way of lives.  Whilst aware of the feeling and fear that these changes were being imposed rather than undertaken in consultation, it was also recognised that the Council needed to get better in ensuring that what it said and intended cut through to the people most affected and were not picked up through other sources.

Commending officers for their support and efforts to date, Councillor Tatler felt that the Council had looked to address the concerns raised in relation to engagement and consultation with over 30 public meetings now undertaken and more being scheduled moving forward.

An assurance was provided that the Council would therefore, be looking to take the issues and concerns raised on board, with Councillor Tatler again thanking the deputations and petitioners for taking the time to participate in the meeting in order to share their different perspectives.  The Council, she pointed out, would only be able to succeed in the face of the climate emergency if they were willing to try initiatives such as healthy neighbourhoods, but recognised these would need to be implemented and assessed as cooperative and collaborative ventures, which had also been a condition of the fast-tracked government funding.  She also felt it was important to note that it had been the government, as part of their funding requirements, who had stipulated the unorthodox process of consultation and engagement being part of the active trials rather than as a precursor to them.

In summing up, Councillor Tatler was keen to once again highlight the need for everyone to be actively involved in addressing the challenges faced and hoped that it would now be possible for everyone to focus their energies on moving forward together and in forging new and lasting partnerships that would ensure it was possible to leave future generations with the proud legacy of a better Brent.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Tatler for her response and advised that as this concluded the item he would move on to deal with the motion submitted as the basis for the Extraordinary Council meeting.